If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.

The Muscle and Brawn Forum is dedicated to no nonsense muscle and strength building. If you need advice that works, you have come to the right place. This forum focuses on building strength and muscle using the basics. You will also find that the Muscle and Brawn community stresses encouragement and respect. Trolls and name calling are not allowed here. No matter what your personal goals are, you will be given effective advice that produces results.

Please consider registering. It takes 30 seconds, and will allow you to get the most out of the forum.

Training ResourcesWorkouts, Form Videos, Muscle and Strength Training Articles...everything you need. Forum includes the best posts from the forum.

This is a re-print of my post at BB.com on the topic of fullbodies vs. splits.

I've had this conversation with Glwanabe, and I will bring it out in the open for others to respond to.

I am very familiar with Casey's work and articles. I trained "in the dark" for about 18 years, meaning that I developed my own training methodologies prior to the Internet era, and they were not based on books or scientific studies. My methodologies, for the most part, aligned with Casey's thinking in this article.

I trained no more then one hour. I used only heavy compound lifts. I trained 4 days a week. I lived for progression, and never found a need for "muscle confusions" and program and exercise rotation. And I rarely did more then 9 sets per muscle per week. I also did very little direct work for biceps, triceps and calves. Of course, these beliefs are not exactly Casey's, but they are closer to Casey's beliefs then they are to Weider's.

So, needless to say, when I read Casey's articles, I become very enamored with his thinking. But where we diverge is at training splits, and I'll explain why.

I was a classic hardgainer entering college. I had trained for 3 years, and was very active as a teen, but I was about 145 pounds and very weak. I couldn't bench more then 95 for reps. Then I discovered squats and the school cafeteria, and the rest was history.

I have never trained full body. Not for any reason other then I never knew people trained full body. Until about 5 years ago. With all this said, here's why I diverge with Casey at splits.

Casey has stated in one of his articles that muscle gains for a natural tend to average around 16 pounds in the first year of serious training, and they are cut in half each year thereafter. So a full body trainee "might" gain as such:

In my experience, this is dead on. I made most of my gains in my first two years. Also, Casey's work on natural muscular potential tells me my potential is around 178-182 pounds of lean mass. I have been around 178-179 for over 10 years, and haven't gained any additional muscle.

So, because natural trainees have natural muscle mass limits, a full body routine might be faster out of the gate for most, but a split will still be viable because there is a wall.

Take two trains leaving the station. Train A is the Full Body Express. Train B is the Weider Express. Train A is faster. Both trains will travel exactly 35 miles (or pounds of muscle mass gained).

Because the track is of limited length, and because Train A is faster, it will also start to slow sooner as it approaches the wall. All the while it's slowing, Train B is still traveling relatively faster because it's further from the wall.

The end game is this...Train A gets you there faster, but because the track is of limited length (or because of the nature of the muscle mass gain/year formula's "curve"), Train B starts to play catchup.

After 5 years or so, both trains are about at the same location, give or take a pound or two of muscle mass.

Why do I prefer Train B?

--Less Warmup Time. Train A requires me to warm up many heavy compound lifts per workout, which ultimately takes away from training time given the one hour window. If I train bench, squat and overhead presses in one workout, my warmups become time consuming - and I'm not one to "overly" warmup.

On a split, I can warmup the bodypart(s) of the day (say chest and triceps) and "gun it." I don't have to stop and warmup for another lift.

--Focus. Because I spent all my time on a particular day on one or two bodyparts, I find that I focus better.

--Joints. I found at a very early age that muscle recovery was not the only variable for me. I also had to contend with joint and connective tissue health. "Back in the day" I trained bodyparts nearly twice a week. I found that my joints, especially my lower back, shoulders, elbows and chest, began to wear down and cry for rest (or de-load periods).

I was working the same joints and connective tissue multiple times per week, and my body did not respond well to it.

Even now, and using a relatively low volume routine (my workouts sometimes run less then 40 minutes), sometimes I am simply not ready for a joint/region to "go" again in 2 days. I understand that Casey advocates a H/L/M approach, but a tired and weak joint is a tired and weak joint. Hitting it with 15 rep sets when it's down isn't always what I'm up for doing. I fear aggravation or injury.

And my shoulder joints just don't feel 100% 2 days after a taking a beating. They tell me "more rest please."

--Muscle Soreness. Certain bodyparts get "real sore" even from a minimal work. My hamstrings and chest get very sore from a minimal 3 set workload. Training with soreness can often force you to make indirect changes to your lifting form to avoid the pain. If my hamstrings are sore from squats, and I have to hammer out RDLs or another leg exercise 2 days later, my form isn't 100% because I'm trying to lift around the pain.

--Pleasure. I enjoy my workouts more when I split them into 4 days. My workouts are brief, more enjoyable, and I get to hit the gym more often. I LIKE lifting, and an extra day of training each week - mentally - is a good thing.

END GAME

Understand, I'm not trying to tell you that I disagree with Casey Butt on the effectiveness of full body routines. I know the research, and understand it. But I am trying to tell the story from the other side of the fence.

Natural lifters can only gain so much muscle. Either way you take, you'll arrive at the station about the same time. In years 3 to 5 on a full body routine, while your gains are slowing, the numbers might be still a tad higher on splits simply because you have more room left to grow.

Full body routines are generally more effective, but to me, they are not without their downsides. I have a hard time using them because I want more joint rest between workouts, because they focus me to spend too much time warming up, because I don't focus as well, and because I don't find them as enjoyable.

I hope my train analogy is making sense to some of you. And I hope you understand that I'm not telling you to train with a split. Me, I just can't, no matter how hard I want to. I've expressed this to Casey before.

I respect Casey, but on the point of splits, I'm a greater proponent then he is.

Yeah, I saw that there too, and its quite an interesting discussion. FWIW, my take on this is simple -

Full-body routines are better, so far as beginners are concerned - at that stage they can progress fast, and higher frequency will help in getting down the form correctly faster.

For recreational lifters, once linear progression stops, they have to come to terms with the fact that they cant make fast gains as they were making in, say the first month of training. I am with you MAB on this one; at this stage, really, it wont matter too much whether they train full-body or a sensible split. However, irrespective of whether someone tries full-body or splits, keeping a balance of intensity, volume and recovery while maintaining some form of progression is the key to productive training at intermediate level.

For competitive athletes, no comments ... simply because I dont compete and dont know what it takes

Going back to full-body routines ... one should remember that a full-body routine need not be the same lifts each day. Actually, lifts should be changed, as should rep ranges and loading to allow for proper periodization. I would say, its probably better to think in terms of "movements", since different movements, even for the same muscle need a different neuromuscular pathway. This should also address to some extent, your concern regarding joints.

I think the old-timers had it spot on. Full-body is awesome to gain strength and size most of the time (off-season) due to the higher frequency (provided the intensity and volume is appropriately cycled); 2 day splits are awesome for 3 months before a contest since that lets you focus more and more on the lagging bodyparts. This isnt to say that splits in the off-season wont be productive. Just pointing out some uses of both forms of training.

While its fun to have these debates, especially because folks on the 'other side' can often help us see/remind stuff that we otherwise wouldnt have seen/thought of, overall, both splits and full-body training systems are excellent tools, and one might as well use them both instead of getting into the one or the other mode. In any case, its always fun to shake up routines in terms of frequency/add an iso for a short while to bring up a lagging part, etc.

Yeah, I saw that there too, and its quite an interesting discussion. FWIW, my take on this is simple -

Full-body routines are better, so far as beginners are concerned - at that stage they can progress fast, and higher frequency will help in getting down the form correctly faster.

I would add - and it's a point that we didn't touch upon in that thread - either way, I strongly believe that a new trainee should be overeating. Not necessarily disgustingly so, but enough to maximize the effects of the stimulus and the body's reaction.

Quote:

Originally Posted by kitarpyar

For recreational lifters, once linear progression stops, they have to come to terms with the fact that they cant make fast gains as they were making in, say the first month of training. I am with you MAB on this one; at this stage, really, it wont matter too much whether they train full-body or a sensible split. However, irrespective of whether someone tries full-body or splits, keeping a balance of intensity, volume and recovery while maintaining some form of progression is the key to productive training at intermediate level.

Good points. I would also add that at this time, the tendency is for a trainee to add more training days. This is often a huge waste of time, because - like you mentioned - strength and mass gains will come slow either way.

Quote:

Originally Posted by kitarpyar

For competitive athletes, no comments ... simply because I dont compete and dont know what it takes

There are many intelligent lifters in the strength community. They get strong as heck on various programs. One thin I'm curious about is why so few actually use a fullbody with just the basics, ala Hepburn, Christy and Park.

Quote:

Originally Posted by kitarpyar

Going back to full-body routines ... one should remember that a full-body routine need not be the same lifts each day. Actually, lifts should be changed, as should rep ranges and loading to allow for proper periodization. I would say, its probably better to think in terms of "movements", since different movements, even for the same muscle need a different neuromuscular pathway. This should also address to some extent, your concern regarding joints.

Good points. Exercise selection has to be well thought out. And, as Casey said, this can be an art form. I lack this art form

Quote:

Originally Posted by kitarpyar

I think the old-timers had it spot on. Full-body is awesome to gain strength and size most of the time (off-season) due to the higher frequency (provided the intensity and volume is appropriately cycled); 2 day splits are awesome for 3 months before a contest since that lets you focus more and more on the lagging bodyparts. This isnt to say that splits in the off-season wont be productive. Just pointing out some uses of both forms of training.

Many old timers also ate like beasts. Hepburn's biography is enough to make a strict bulker vomit. the man was an eating machine. One thing I'm under-educated about is how oldtimers cut, or maintained lower fat levels.

Quote:

Originally Posted by kitarpyar

While its fun to have these debates, especially because folks on the 'other side' can often help us see/remind stuff that we otherwise wouldnt have seen/thought of, overall, both splits and full-body training systems are both good tools, and one might as well use them both. In any case, its always fun to shake up routines in terms of frequency/add an iso for a short while to bring up a lagging part, etc.

Either way, fullbody or split, it has to be primarily heavy compounds, progression, high motivation, proper eating, rest, and generally 2 to 4 workouts per week.

Actually, I don't disagree with anything you said Steve, but I seem to have become a "champion" of full-body routines because I'm one of the few people currently promoting them. Like I said, people like to cling to absolutes.

That said, I think this part needs fleshing out...

Quote:
Originally Posted by fatdaddy67 View Post
--Joints. I found at a very early age that muscle recovery was not the only variable for me. I also had to contend with joint and connective tissue health. "Back in the day" I trained bodyparts nearly twice a week. I found that my joints, especially my lower back, shoulders, elbows and chest, began to wear down and cry for rest (or de-load periods).

I was working the same joints and connective tissue multiple times per week, and my body did not respond well to it.

Even now, and using a relatively low volume routine (my workouts sometimes run less then 40 minutes), sometimes I am simply not ready for a joint/region to "go" again in 2 days. I understand that Casey advocates a H/L/M approach, but a tired and weak joint is a tired and weak joint. Hitting it with 15 rep sets when it's down isn't always what I'm up for doing. I fear aggravation or injury.

And my shoulder joints just don't feel 100% 2 days after a taking a beating. They tell me "more rest please."

I understand that completely, and I'm in the same boat myself, but there's much more to advanced H/L/M training than just rep choices. The biggest key to the light day for very advanced trainees is not actually the rep range but the exercise choice. For instance, if your shoulder joints took a beating on Monday then you'd necessarily have to choose "therapeutic/rehabilitative" exercises for the shoulder joints on Wednesday. That could mean something like Bench Presses on Monday and DB Pullovers or rotator cuff work on Wednesday - completely different planes of motion and stresses. In that case, the light day actually becomes a type of mid-week rehab day in preparation for heavy/medium work again on Friday. I personally can't press heavily three times a week, and most people can't either, so I don't do it and typically don't recommend it. The pressing muscles, however, can be stimulated that often, so I'll go with Pullovers, Flyes, rotator cuff work, various DB work, etc, on light days and I let my joints dictate how hard I push those. If the weights are necessarily light then I cut rest periods to get a training effect (Gironda's 8x8 is often a good scheme here). Incidentally, that's what I recommend for all advanced trainees.

But, having said all that, what most people find is that over time the light day work actually strengthens their joints and improves their exercise tolerance. You have to consider that after years of training relatively infrequently your joints and nervous system have had the "luxury" of extended rest periods and have adapted within that time frame. Like anything else, with proper gradual conditioning they will adapt to shorter recovery periods as well.

For advanced lifters switching to full body programs conditioning is the biggest, and usually the most underestimated, limiting factor.

This is also exactly how Olympic Lifters build up to what most bodybuilders would consider insane frequencies, even with exercises such as heavy Squats and Deadlifts multiple times per week - gradual conditioning and the proper selection of exercises and intensities.

Quote:
--Muscle Soreness. Certain bodyparts get "real sore" even from a minimal work. My hamstrings and chest get very sore from a minimal 3 set workload. Training with soreness can often force you to make indirect changes to your lifting form to avoid the pain. If my hamstrings are sore from squats, and I have to hammer out RDLs or another leg exercise 2 days later, my form isn't 100% because I'm trying to lift around the pain.

That's a very good point. But again, even soreness is a matter of conditioning. Frank Zane used to say he could tell how good a shape he was in by how quickly he got sore and recovered from it. When you're "in shape" you get sore faster after training and recover from that soreness faster as well. Like anything, it's a matter of the body adapting to the time frame it's given. But...

Not all people will be able to carry that off because of technique and postural issues, etc. Some exercises, such as power-style Squats, Good Mornings, RDLs, SLDLs, etc, put significant eccentric loading on the hamstrings and typically cause soreness. In that case, light day exercise selection and/or exercise technique becomes vitally important - for instance, part of the reason Oly Lifters can Squat so frequently is because they do so in a very upright style that minimally stresses the hamstrings and lower back in comparison to power-style Squats. In addition, one of the primary reasons the lower back recovers so slowly is because as a postural muscle is rarely gets a chance to completely relax and because of that is always mildly flexed and mildy ischemic (or worse) - little oxygen means slow recovery and so the lower back muscles can seem to take forever to recover from a session of heavy Deadlifts or Squats. In that case, you're right, you can't train it heavily three times per week. A person with such tendencies (and it's very largely biomechanically/posturally influenced) would have to use the light day more as an active recovery day for the lower back than a "real" training day. Many people, including myself, fall into this category with regards to the posterior chain in particular. In your example, if soreness was affecting technique I wouldn't recommend that exercise on that day; I'd use a variation, a completely different loading pattern - such as Leg Curls, Glute-ham Raises or even Back Extensions instead of RDLs - or none at all.
Quote:
--Pleasure. I enjoy my workouts more when I split them into 4 days. My workouts are brief, more enjoyable, and I get to hit the gym more often. I LIKE lifting, and an extra day of training each week - mentally - is a good thing.

This, I think, is the real factor. Some people simply enjoy one form of training over the other for various reasons. In that case, it's often hard to embrace a new style of training. Of course, many people (including myself) have done it because it's largely a function of what you get used to. But I can't disagree that doing what you enjoy is a big factor.

Quote:
Full body routines are generally more effective, but to me, they are not without their downsides. I have a hard time using them because I want more joint rest between workouts, because they focus me to spend too much time warming up, because I don't focus as well, and because I don't find them as enjoyable.

Warming up and time conservation is another "art form". Whenever possible I structure things to logically lead into the next. For instance, between my last two sets of Rows I start light work on the Incline Bench to get ready for the heavier stuff. It's two minutes I wouldn't be using anyway, and I find that the light antagonist work actually helps the back muscles recover faster than just sitting around. Of course, if you're completely unaccustomed to that then it might take a short while to get used to it, but it's no big deal. Likewise, I start warming up for Squats in between sets of Overhead Presses. I find the Overhead Press weights are perfect for getting the knees and back "lubed" for heavier Squatting. This has the added advantage of reserving the equipment in a busy gym - by intertwining the last heavy sets of one exercise with the warm-up sets of the next you ensure that you won't have to wait between exercises. By doing things like this I typically manage to keep even my heaviest, highest volume workouts to within 1:20 - and that's a workout containing Bench Presses, Incline DB Presses, Rack Deadlifts, Pull-ups, Overhead Presses, Lateral Raises and Squats ...if I'm well rested, well-nourished and making good time I might throw in a few sets Front Squats as well. That's obviously an advanced form of heavy day, a medium day would be about an hour and light day the same.

Of course, these suggestions won't solve everybody's problems, and some people simply mentally like one form of training over another. But my point is that many "problems" are often not really problems at all, or only seem to be problems because of application and are, in fact, overcome with the appropriate approach.

This is my theory and has worked (obviously) This also may come off the wrong way and some (alot) of people will probably disagree with me, but Im also 5'11, 205lbs with 10% BF, so dont listen to me...LOL

This repeats its self over for 6 days, day 1,3,5 are the same muscle groups but different compound workouts in each day. Along with days 2,4, and 6.

This sort of "confuses" my body in the switch and right when my body gets used to the full body workout and all the extra soreness is gone I switch to a 3 day a week program consisting of SUPER HEAVY weight and Key lifts EX- Bench, Squat, Deadlift, and Overhead Presses. I will pack on the weight to determine my gains and do low sets such as 5/5/4/3/2/1. This gives me an idea of what kind of gains this "Lifting" cycle has gave me. Works everytime and im going up 10-15 lbs on all main lifts in 8-10 weeks, not to mention I look like a house

My opinion on split routines is, everyone says theyre good for bodybuilders on the juice...Well why not lift like they do and use food for your juice instead of roids? I believe that split routines can and will work if you know the key to manipulating them. And that is the right amount of rest between sets, the right amount of sets and workload (3-4 sets of 8-10 with a light warmup to start, no more than 3-4 compound exercises per muscle group) Also eat like a Bull and and get your sleep.

My opinion on split routines is, everyone says they're good for bodybuilders on the juice...Well why not lift like they do and use food for your juice instead of roids? I believe that split routines can and will work if you know the key to manipulating them. And that is the right amount of rest between sets, the right amount of sets and workload (3-4 sets of 8-10 with a light warmup to start, no more than 3-4 compound exercises per muscle group) Also eat like a Bull and and get your sleep.

If you're young with a good metabolism, I firmly believe in this method. It worked for me at 19-20 when my metabolism and hormones were peaking.

I've followed the discussion going at BB.com. It seems some people only want to argue with no real purpose, instead, just poking holes in the information being presented. When, they could be trying to comprehend what is being presented, and use it in a better fashion than just saying, your wrong, I don't like this. They offer nothing in the way of meaningful counterpoint.

My personal road to finding Casey Butts work came about with my interest in classic bodybuilding. The Classic Physique Builder, blog caught my eye, and it seemed just like the sort of thing I was looking for. Along the way I found some things I didn't agree with in what was being presented, but I still liked the overall message.

Something that I did not agree with, was the notion that we have not learned anything new since the 1950's with regards to natural bodybuilding. I can't even remember how I found Casey's site. I did, and for myself it was just what I was looking for. It seemed to be basically the exact answer I needed.

The same situation led me to this site, and I almost immediately felt this was the right place to set up a new home, to lift at. The few months since I've been here, I've had several converstaions with MAB about this topic. He's pointed me in the right direction several times, when I've questioned certain aspects of lifting. Instead of lecturing, he just points me to something, and lets me explore it on my own.

I've choosen as a project for myself to pursue my current goals using Caseys work as a blueprint of sorts. Both to build a classic bodybuilder physique, and to use my experience as my own learning tool. There's a lot of info in my "Evil Plan" folder that pertains to Caseys work, and John Christy's as well.

I like to keeps things as simple as possible, and don't like getting wrapped up in discussions that go into super technical detail. I get enough of that in my daily job as it is. This is my hobby, so it needs to be fun, and something I can not worry about minutia to much. It seems some people like to get wrapped up in what is the exact best sarcoplasmic hypertrophy, blah,blah blah. Just go lift with a basic proven plan, and quit thinking so much.

MAB and I have had several converstions about him getting on a fullbody routine. Like he has said, it's just not as fun for him. This should be fun, shouldn't it? You gotta do whats right for you.

At least read what Casey's saying and digest it. There's a lot of good solid training info that he has put together. If you only were to use half of what he says, you'd still be better off than a lot of people. The thread at BB.com is full of solid info. Not to mention his site, and all the stuff here on the front page. It goes counter to what so many have been led to believe is the "Gospel" of how to train. In my pursuit of "classic" bodybuilding, it nails it on the head for me.

I've followed the discussion going at BB.com. It seems some people only want to argue with no real purpose, instead, just poking holes in the information being presented. When, they could be trying to comprehend what is being presented, and use it in a better fashion than just saying, your wrong, I don't like this. They offer nothing in the way of meaningful counterpoint.

I hope I didn't come off that way. I wanted to bring up my history so we could have a solid look at the debate instead of it turning into chaos.

Personally, I DO want to try a fullbody...I just need to find one that I enjoy and look forward to. I've expressed this to you, and I want you to know that I am serious about it. I have much to learn about programming a fullbody though.

Some of the younger guys might have more of a "just do it" attitude, but it's not that easy when you're a geezer. There are more factors involved. I know precisely what stimulates my body, and putting those puzzle pieces into a new puzzle takes time.

Quote:

Originally Posted by glwanabe

My personal road to finding Casey Butts work came about with my interest in classic bodybuilding. The Classic Physique Builder, blog caught my eye, and it seemed just like the sort of thing I was looking for. Along the way I found somethings I didn't agree with in what was being presented, but I still liked the overall message.

As do I. As I mentioned, after years of training outside of the Weider realm, I found Casey's writings to be just what the doctor ordered.

Quote:

Originally Posted by glwanabe

Something that I did not agree with, was the notion that we have not learned anything new since the 1950's with regards to natural bodybuilding. I can't even remember how I found Casey's site. I did, and for myself it was just what I was looking for. It seemed to be basically the exact answer I needed.

That's a good point, and one that all of us need to be reminded of. The past is not perfect just because it is the past.

Quote:

Originally Posted by glwanabe

The same situation led me to this site, and I almost immediately felt this was the right place to set up a new home, to lift at. The few months since I've been here, I've had several converstaions with MAB about this topic. He's pointed me in the right direction several times, when I've questioned certain aspects of lifting. Instead of lecturing, he just points me to something, and lets me explore it on my own.

And I hope our friendship continues. I am no expert by any means. I do have stubborn, firm beliefs, but I also realize that everyone is different.

Quote:

Originally Posted by glwanabe

I've choosen as a project for myself to pursue my current goals using Caseys work as a blueprint of sorts. Both to build a classic bodybuilder physique, and to use my experience as my own learning tool. There's a lot of info in my "Evil Plan" that pertains to Caseys work, and John Christy's as well.

Trust me when I say this...the more I learn about what Weider fed me, and the reality that this method doesn't translate well for the natural side, the more I want to explore older methods.

My latest log is based on the approach of strongman Doug Hepburn. While it's not a cookie cutter of his template, it is definitely Hepburnesque.

I enjoy Christy, Butt, Ditillo and Hepburn.

Quote:

Originally Posted by glwanabe

I like to keeps things as simple as possible, and don't like getting wrapped up in discussions that go into super technical detail. I get enough of that in my daily job as it is. This is my hobby, so it needs to be fun, and something I can not worry about minutia to much. It seems some people like to get wrapped up in what is the exact best sarcoplasmic hypertrophy, blah,blah blah. Just go lift with a basic proven plan, and quit thinking so much.

I agree with this. Sometimes we put so much emphasis on the method that the most important aspect of success is neglected...effort.

I believe that progression of weight is the holy grail, and as long as its begin pursued, just about any routine can "do".

If you guys would meet me in person, you would understand that I'm pretty much a "shut up and get it done without excuses" type of guy. I see large rock...I move large rock. And if at first it doesn't budge, I made adjustments on the fly. I HATE over-thinking. I really do.

Basics + progression + food + 2-4 training days per week = growth. I DESPISE what I consider silly..."muscle confusion", and all the BS that comes with it like the endless desire to fool a muscle with pre-exhaustion, etc.

As a wise man once said...want to "fool" your muscles? Go do 20 rest-pause deadlifts with 400 pounds in 10 to 15 minutes. Your body won't know what the hell is going on.

Quote:

Originally Posted by glwanabe

MAB and I have had several converstions about him getting on a fullbody routine. Like he has said, it's just not as fun for him. This should be fun, shouldn't it? You gotta do whats right for you.

I want it to be fun. As Casey mentioned, much of fullbody design is an art form. I simply am having a hard time dealing with warmup sets. I don't know how to prep for bench, military press, squats and deadlifts without doing 3-4 warmup sets each.

As an advanced trainee, I don't have the benefit of fullbody training evolution. If I can find a way to minimize overall warmups per workout, I would be a happy camper.

Quote:

Originally Posted by glwanabe

At least read what Casey's saying and digest it. There's a lot of good solid training info that he has put together. If you only were to use half of what he says, you'd still be better off than a lot of people. The thread at BB.com is full of solid info. Not to mention his site, and all the stuff here on the front page. It goes counter to what so many have been led to believe is the "Gospel" of how to train. In my pursuit of "classic" bodybuilding, it nails it on the head for me.

Now lets go lift some Iron!!

At the end of the day, the article of Casey's that we are discussing is pretty much the gospel to me. And like all religions, I'm still trying to apply it to my life.

hope I didn't come off that way. I wanted to bring up my history so we could have a solid look at the debate instead of it turning into chaos.

No, you did not come off that way. I wish half the people who had responded had done so in like fashion. There is a way to discuss something, and that was not done so much in that thread. To his credit Casey answered every arrow, with a solid return. Unfortunately there is also a lot of him having to repeat himself, with fairly easy to understand language.

Quote:

Personally, I DO want to try a fullbody...I just need to find one that I enjoy and look forward to. I've expressed this to you, and I want you to know that I am serious about it. I have much to learn about programming a fullbody though.

As do I. Thats one of the reasons I can't write that thread I want yet. It's going to take time to explore lots of variables. Writing that thread is a learning tool for me.

Quote:

That's a good point, and one that all of us need to be reminded of. The past is not perfect just because it is the past.

True. Learn from the past or be doomed to repeat it.

Quote:

And I hope our friendship continues. I am no expert by any means. I do have stubborn, firm beliefs, but I also realize that everyone is different.

It will, and we will put the program together. Casey said a lot of stuff today that we can use for you.

Quote:

Trust me when I say this...the more I learn about what Weider fed me, and the reality that this method doesn't translate well for the natural side, the more I want to explore older methods.

So far I'm having a lot of fun with the older methods. They are bringing me back faster than I ever have before.

Quote:

Sometimes we put so much emphasis on the method that the most important aspect of success is neglected...effort.

I believe that progression of weight is the holy grail, and as long as its begin pursued, just about any routine can "do".

I find myself repeating. Progression is king!! Then I add weight to the bar.
15lbs in two weeks.

Quote:

I HATE over-thinking.

Exactly.

Quote:

Basics + progression + food + 2-4 training days per week = growth. I DESPISE what I consider silly..."muscle confusion", and all the BS that comes with it like the endless desire to fool a muscle with pre-exhaustion, etc.

Muscle confusion, and shocking is bullshit!

Quote:

I want it to be fun. As Casey mentioned, much of fullbody design is an art form. I simply am having a hard time dealing with warmup sets. I don't know how to prep for bench, military press, squats and deadlifts without doing 3-4 warmup sets each.

As an advanced trainee, I don't have the benefit of fullbody training evolution. If I can find a way to minimize overall warmups per workout, I would be a happy camper.

You'll get it. If not I've got a big stick to poke you with.

Quote:

At the end of the day, the article of Casey's that we are discussing is pretty much the gospel to me. And like all religions, I'm still trying to apply it to my life.